Feature request: add verifyNoRequests(MicrocksRequest request) helper

[lukaszgyg]

Feature summary

Add a verifyNoRequests(MicrocksRequest request) helper to MicrocksClient.

Motivation

MicrocksClient already exposes filtered request accessors such as:

• verify(request)
• getRecordedRequests(request)
• getRecordedRequestCount(request)
• getLastRecordedRequest(request)

A negative assertion for a filtered request matcher is currently missing.

This makes simple assertions more verbose in tests where we want to express that no matching request was observed for a specific method/path/query/header/body combination.

Proposed API

client.verifyNoRequests(
    request()
        .withMethod("DELETE")
        .withPath("/orders/123")
);

Why this is useful

This keeps the API symmetric and avoids manual filtering of recorded requests in test code.

Scope

This is intended as a small additive helper only. It should reuse the existing request matching / recorded request retrieval logic and not introduce any new matching model.

[github-actions]

👋 @lukaszgyg

Welcome to the Microcks community! 💖

Thanks and congrats 🎉 for opening your first issue here! Be sure to follow the issue template or please update it accordingly.

📢 If you're using Microcks in your organization, please add your company name to this list. 🙏 It really helps the project to gain momentum and credibility. It's a small contribution back to the project with a big impact.

If you need to know why and how to add yourself to the list, please read the blog post "Join the Microcks Adopters list and Empower the vibrant open source Community 🙌"

Hope you have a great time there!

🌟 ~~~~~~~~~ 🌟

📢 If you like Microcks, please ⭐ star ⭐ our repo to support it!

🙏 It really helps the project to gain momentum and credibility. It's a small contribution back to the project with a big impact.

[lukaszgyg]

For additional context behind this request: we are currently using Microcks internally at GetYourGuide for contract-backed API mocking and integration testing, and this helper would make that workflow a bit cleaner for our test code.